Talk:Councilist Democracy
I just noticed that it says, for the presidential election, the "candidate receives the majority of votes wins." What if there is no majority? Then, does the candidate with the most votes win, a run-off election is scheduled for a few weeks later, or does Everett use the Alternative Vote system (where you order any number of candidates according to preference)? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 13:19, September 1, 2011 (UTC) The chances of a perfect tie when about 190-200 million voters vote and there is a PERFECT 50/50 result is extremely rare. I'd say an additional amount of votes would be legalized to break the tie such as allowing 16 and 17 year olds to vote. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 13:37, September 1, 2011 (UTC) Wait, only two candidates are allowed? I'm talking as if there are 3 or 4 candidates, and no one gets over 50% of the vote. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 16:09, September 1, 2011 (UTC) Oh. Whoever has the most votes, wins. That's what it says. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 16:51, September 1, 2011 (UTC) No, it says "The President is voted into office by the citizens, the overall majority wins," which means that whichever candidate gets the majority of votes wins. I think if you mean that, you should change it to "The President is voted into office by the citizens, the candidate who receives the plurality of votes wins," instead. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 17:17, September 1, 2011 (UTC) Oh, by the way, are political parties still banned? If so, I think they shouldn't be. Pretty much every other country has them. However, you could discourage the two party system with anti-superfunding laws. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:13, September 14, 2011 (UTC) I think it's best not to have political parties. It allows for a bias banded into the party member. Let's say a small child learns from hid parents that the Liberal Party is bad, and the Reactionist Party is good. (Note: I am a self proclaimed Social Democrat, I might bend this badly if you are Reactionist). The child will believe the parent if the parent nurses him as so. The child will continue to believe this if he lacks proper education, and is a pupil that will refuse to listen to his teachers. The child will grow up to be a social recluse with zero knowledge of the Liberal Party's true goals. The common pupil of my school would not have a clue what Laisse Faire means. I think the situation of the United States is not a good one. Therefore, I conclude that the common pupil will not embrace newer liberal ideas, and remain ignorant until he gets a hold of the Real World. I rue for the days when Famous people knew what Ostentatious and Egotistic meant... (ᵒᴥᵒ) MineCraftian (Talk) (South America - Wringo - Oil City - Sola) (ᵒᴥᵒ) 21:48, September 14, 2011 (UTC) 1940's and 50's, kids were being taught to accept that of other races, and had educational videos on how to act. Comb hair, girls wear skirts, and be polite. Its weird because I just watched one in my English Class, and one of my classmates called it a, "Nazi Youth video." It was really scary that they feed kids this information, but turned out to be a liberal society while still being orderly. I had that front fear that, "Propaganda is scary," but then deep down, "I wish my generation acted this kind, and polite." I think forming a political party would be better for them instead to be in secret clubs. If I ran for an office, I would rather be in a party because they support common people with money to run, instead of rich independents running all the time. -Sunkist- 23:09, September 14, 2011 (UTC) Why would a person running for public office need money? What is this, a Plutocracy? (ᵒᴥᵒ) MineCraftian (Talk) (South America - Wringo - Oil City - Sola) (ᵒᴥᵒ) 00:09, September 15, 2011 (UTC) Signs, adds, equiqment, meeting setups, BBQ's. For some reason in America, people just don't vote that much, and people who run really have to get the word out. If it was a mantatory vote, Democrats would win Presidential Elections year after year. -Sunkist- 00:13, September 15, 2011 (UTC) Advertising should be illegal. It's unfair to, oh I don't know, the Socialist Party if the Libertarians can put a giant billboard in front of the Socialist Headquarters. Voting should be mandatory for tax payers and students over the age of 14 who pass some kind of test to vote. (ᵒᴥᵒ) MineCraftian (Talk) (South America - Wringo - Oil City - Sola) (ᵒᴥᵒ) 00:17, September 15, 2011 (UTC) This is America, land of the free and we choose what we want to do with our money and vote. Take a test, now is this now some type of, "Only the smart people get to vote?" -Sunkist- 00:24, September 15, 2011 (UTC) Not a knowledge test you study for, a maturity and intellectuality test. And no, this is Everett, land of the Uberliberal. (ᵒᴥᵒ) MineCraftian (Talk) (South America - Wringo - Oil City - Sola) (ᵒᴥᵒ) 00:34, September 15, 2011 (UTC) I one day hope to see a United States again, prehaps a shared nation between Ham and Super. Liberal and Conservative traits, but still work together. -Sunkist- 00:39, September 15, 2011 (UTC)